The question which keeps haunting much of Coetzee's writing is how to do justice to the (racial/gender) Other in the dominant language that has historically been one of the instruments ensuring that this Other is kept subordinate. This question is about taking sides: would you side with the dominant history written by the victors? Or would you side with the vanquished in the unfailing quest for justice, even if the possibility of restorative justice is limited? In Waiting for the Barbarians, the Magistrate is tormented by this ethical question. In his strange relationship with the barbarian girl, he tries to respond ethically to the otherness of this individual who has been classified as inferiro by virtue of race and gender. This (im)possibility of representing the Other constitutes the Magistrate's version of hell and his obsession with shame, damnation, ethical responsibility, and searching for salvation.
Here are three audio clips regarding this well-known South African novelist and his work. Listen carefully and write down anything that inspires you.
25 comments:
History is extremely subjective. It changes along with different cultures and countries. Even two countries with the same language can have two totally different explanations to their history, like Taiwan and China. In the Waiting for the Barbarians, the Magistrate reflected on himself as a superior again and again and wanted to find out the history which was not created by the dominance. He dug for the relics form desert and tried to reconstruct the history of the inhabitant. However, the dominant side eliminated the Other to construct the authority and then the created the history. J.M. Coetzee understands the apartheid in South Africa and sympathize the situation. As a white person, he also suffers from the ambivalence like the Magistrate in the story, he is indirectly related to the system and the ambivalence between being the authority and justice seems an unsolvable question. I am wondering but question that is there any one can record the “true” history. No matter which side we support with, the history can only be known by the people who are at the right moment of history.
J. M. Coetzee is really a talented man. He is a novelist and literary critic as well as a translator. He has won the Booker Prize twice and was awarded the 2003 Nobel Prize in literature. He was sided today by the Swedish Academy for the variety in his work. “No two books follow the same recipe.” The statement said. However, he didn’t go to pick up either his two Booker Prizes in person. In the audio, the speaker said that J. M. Coetzee is a self deprecating and notoriously private man. When he knew that he won the Booker Prize the second time, he told BBC he didn’t believe that he would ever be ruined by fame.
In his books he takes a very bleak view of the world. In “Waiting for the Barbarians”, the main character struggles with damnation with search for salvation even though at times many of the characters in his book don’t find that. The most impressive thing to me about him is that he is a vegetarian. He doesn’t drink and smoke. Besides, he cycles long distance to keep fit and spend at least an hour at his writing every morning. I think he must be a man of principle who does everything orderly, and I think he is influenced by the history very deeply so he write so many novels and literary works about how dominant political groups impose on the Other.
Our author Coetzee comes from a farm family. He is a solitary person, and he sets to write every day. He doesn’t eat meat, doesn’t drink, and doesn’t smoke. He is the sort of a person who attends dinner party without speaking to anyone, but he still has the ability to speak for solitary people. Also, he is a reclusive man, rarely gives interviews and he doesn’t even speak much about his work. As far as I’m concerned, it needs a lot of experiences to be a good writer. Traveling, talking to local guys, always willing to be open-minded are things a writer would do to gain his or her perspective and viewpoints. I don’t mean Coetzee doesn’t have those traits, but he is kind of like a loner or a hermit, which is more amazing that he can actually win the prize, Nobel Prize. But he does have a regular life as a writer! He often writes from an outsider’s point of view. I’m impressed because most of the stories we read are talking about those who are well-known and famous among people. Like the history is written by the victors, the winners, so the losers and the minority don’t get a chance to be a part of the writing process. Moreover, he has characters that really struggling with damnation, search for salvation even though at times many of the characters don’t find that (not just in Waiting for the Barbarians). This is complicated. It seems like the author has some grief or guilt that need to be eliminate, so he writes to partake the emotion. Or maybe because he is a hermit he can see and feel things clearer than normal people do.
J. M. Coetzee comes from a farm family, and he takes obvious political position and is good at speaking for solitary people. I am so impressed that like Kafka, although he is such a talented novelist, winning Booker Prize and Nobel Prize, he is self-deprecating as if he says that he didn’t believe that he would ever be ruined by fame. I think that Coetzee has shown a pattern that a great person always keeps a humble mind.
Besides, in his work, Coetzee always elaborates how dominant political groups impulse their ways on cultures. Take “Waiting for Barbarian” for example, from the self-introspection of the Magistrate and the representation of the Other, we, as readers, also question on ourselves and take colonial nightmare seriously.
The audio has mentioned another novel, “Disgrace”, by Coetzee. In the story, David fails to protect his daughter, Lucy, from rape and robbery by local Black thugs. Lucy represents a South Africa, and Coetzee represents that South Africa has been raped and violated by whites during the Apartheid, while the Blacks inherits the same pattern in the new South Africa. To be more specific, the Black thugs represent a new leadership (the caretakers) that simply repeats the behavior of rape and violation of the white predecessors. This phenomenon makes me think of a film named Xala (Ousmane Sembene, 1975), which also represents that the national bourgeoisies in Senegal also step into the shoes of their white colonists and symbolizes that the neo-colonialism just only cripples the nation and brings political and economic impotence.
I am also impressed what Coetzee says "I am not a herald of community or anything else. I am someone who has intimations of freedom (as every chained prisoner has) and constructs representations of people slipping their chains and turning their faces to the light.” In a word, I believe that J. M. Coetzee’s novels do have the same revolutionary power as The Third Cinema.
Cj-Chen has mentioned that the real history exist the break between this history and the other history. As for Coetzee, he thinks that the history is the history of victor with the dominant language, so he speaks for the solitary people with the bleak point of view, and he also portrayed a picture of south-Africa. He was influenced deeply by his background because he is a white South-African. He tries to reconsider ourselves in the member of the dominant world, how we treat the minority people. He tries to dig out the invisible history of minority. In the novel of J.M Coetzee, Waiting for Barbarian, he dealt with the ethical and political problems, and the relationship between the local people and the government. The magistrate is in an ambivalent position because he is not on the side of government to do something brutal to the barbarian but as the member of the dominant organization, he reconsidered himself as the oppressor to the barbarian. The strange relationship to the barbarian girl, the behavior is a progress of redemption. In the other novel of J.M Coetzee, “Disgrace” won the 2003 Nobel Prize. The book also painted the vivid picture of people in South-Africa. It is a traveling story in “Disgrace” because it describes a professor, David Lurie, who has a love affair with his student. Then he went to find her daughter, experiencing some incidents and change his life and the relationship with his daughter, Lucy. The novel also talked about the racial problem because Lucy was raped by three black men, but she didn’t want to report it for she thinks it is white woman’s burden. It points out that the culture conflicts result from the racial separation. In J.M Coetzee’s fiction world, we can reconsider something that we never regard it as a big deal and the position in the society. He leaded us to see the other side of the world and tried to find the bright side in the dark world.
J.M. Coetzee is a distinguished essayist and novelist. He is the fourth African who won the Nobel prise. He was said that no two books ever follow the same recipe.
He is a political writer. His story looks inward to the innermost grand of conflict in South Africa. He often writes from an outsider’s point of view. His books are deeply political, they are fascinated with power and they often explore how dominant political groups impose their way on cultures. Just like the book Waiting for the Barbarians shows. His books also concern with morality.
Although his books are about South Africa, his works are not very popular there; partly because he writes in English but also because he won’t take obvious political positions. His book is more personal and therefore more disturbing.
He comes from a farming family in South Africa. He is a notoriously private man. He has won many prises before. He had won Booker Prize twice, but he did not go to London to pick up either Booker Prize. He rarely says anything, rarely gives interviews, and doesn’t speak much about his work. He said he is not a herald of community or anything else. He is someone who has intimations of freedom, as every chained prisoner has, and constructs representations of people slipping their chains and turning their faces to the light. Maybe that's the reason why he has the ability to speak for solitary people, because he enjoys that and knows that well.
J.M. Coetzee is renowned for his seemingly simple yet dark political writings about South Africa and is a zealous anti-apartheid. Regardless of other factors, what I admire J.M. Coetzee the most is his awareness and integrity on political issues. Born as a Caucasian in South Africa, J.M. Coetzee did not choose to stand on the same side as many other white people. Instead, he sees and thinks beyond others, and firmly believes in his cause.
From the radio program, it is said that J.M. Coetzee is a solitary writer and is not interested in fame at all. I believe such traits of his can be detected from his writing. In J.M. Coetzee’s writing, he often puts himself as an outsider, examines and reveals the dark side of the world. His works are highly political and ethical and as J.M. Coetzee pointed out himself, he regards his writing rather private as he does not mind revealing his obvious political side in it. He is not a man who cares about and goes after the main-stream or universal worldly values; he is aware of integrity and political justice.
In one word, I admire J.M. Coetzee’s ethical and political integrity and his awareness of social injustice especially when this type of spirit is rare to find and valuable in human’s society.
J.M Coetzee seldom takes interviews, yet he is well-respected in the literature field. He captures the bleak side of the world in a very remarkable way.
He is a doubter and critic of the modern materialism. His works are simple but dark novels. His characters are in their own version of hell, searching for salvation. And they are not always able to get out from it. The solitude of his characters is a way for the readers to look inward into their minds. J M. Coetzee is a white South African, who often writes from an outsider’s point of view. He puts distance between himself and South Africans. His works reveals the fundamental issue is the ethic and political question of what it means to live in or to live with Africans. His works try to deal with the issue of human pain, suffering, and shame.
The speaker mentions that some people criticize him for his bleak picture and description of South Africa regardless of the change of "New Africa." However, J.M Coetzee doesn't take those comments as offenses; he continues to portray the dark side of that area.
“Celebrity’s status is something that I have managed to crush successfully in my life.” J.M. Coetzee said. In my image, geniuses always have something weird and not understandable personality. J.M. Coetzee doesn’t disappoint his strange; he’s really a peculiar but talented man. He does not drink, smoke or eat meat, and from his interview, we can even know that he never care about reputation and rarely talk about his work. One of his friends said that he cycles vast distances to keep fit and spends at least an hour at his writing-desk each morning, seven days a week. In my point of view, he treats himself so cruel must make him extraordinary.
When I was little, I deeply believe in our history describing on the textbook. I was so angry and depressed when I saw the Nanking Massacre. However, I have heard that in the textbook of Japan, it had been described as a necessary method to strong their country. And I found how history subjective is. Even the same thing happen in one country may be portrait in different for having different political party so I think it is very important to cultivate the ability to doubt and think everything.
49602029 Joanne
J.M. Coetzee seems a common person; he handles the matter which every person can do, but actually l think there must be some special thoughts in his mind. He is outwardly silent but inwardly critical and quite active. He is a solitary person (he doesn’t speak to anyone in a party), and he is inclined to have no meat, no wine, and smoking. Those things cannot fritter away any of his talent, on the other hands, he uses his slight power of observations, writes those novels which has obvious political position.
He thinks that the history is the history of victor with the dominant language. In my opinion, it is a universal culture pattern. Think of “the news of today,” is also “the history of tomorrow.” but the most important thing is: who writes those “history?” it must be the powerful sides. For example, when it changes a dynasty, the later one writes historical documents for the former. For the sake of seeking unity of thinking, the later dynasty might tamper with the fact. Those writers might be compelled to do that, but the result is the “history” was changed, by documents. Fortunately, we still can take notes on what was happened (compare to the formerly people.)
The story A Good Man Is Hard to Find talks about a whole family trip to Florida, but on the way there, they changed their destination, the house with the secret panel, because of the trick of Bailey’s mother. Soon after they kept going their new destination, they have a car accident. The place they stayed was the graves of all the family members.
One of the three guys is The Misfit, the leader of the others’ men. He is the meanest one of the three. He ordered the two guys to kill the whole people in order. Bailey’s mother was the last one.
During the time of her families being killed, Bailey’s mother started to convince The Misfit not to kill them by words of churches; she believed in the words her said finally could make him quit being a bad guy.
Although all of people on the car were died finally, the thought and the mind of The Misfit had slightly changed in the ending. He said”she would of been a good women” and “shut up. It’s no real pleasure in life.” It is very strange for the worst guy to say someone is a good. And the last sentence The Misfit said showed that he still had mercy and was tired of killing others.
Maybe, I guess, he decided not to kill anyone any longer because of Bailey’s mother’s few words. I thought this was the moment of grace O’Connor would like to express to us.
J.M. Coetzee is absolutely a talented essayist and novelist, but he is really humble and outstanding because the awards he got don't mean a lot to himself. Although he already won the Booker prize and Nobel prize, he never stops he efforts to make the whole world understand that there are many different culture and history existing in the world. In his works, he tries to express the oppression of the dominant society gives to the minor groups, and I think it is a extraordinary thing because J.M. Coetzee is the dominant one. In fact, he can still go on his life without these thoughts, but he still tries his efforts to make the world understand. I think that he clearly explains those ideas and his principles in his novel "Waiting for the barbarians." The main character stands on the side of minor group with struggling, and I think it is just the portray of the author himself's struggle in his political status and situation.
History is always written by the victors, but I believe that the history of minor groups has the same power in forming the whole world today. Thus, the official history written by dominants should not deliberately erase the diversities and differences. Thus, I think J.M. Coetzee's efforts make everyone in the world have more chances to understand importance of diversity and
49702048 Dalia
Hearing from the audio clips, it says that J.M. Coetzee is a notoriously private man for he didn’t pick up the prizes he won. J.M. Coetzee turns the solitude in the story inward to the inner conflicts in south Africa. He is a white south African who often writes from an outsider of point of view. The commentator states that J.M. Coetzee’s work covers the issues of ethical and political questions. It not only reveals the problems in south Africa but also the universal problems. In the Waiting for the Barbarians, the Magistrate reflects on his identity as a member of the empire. Throughout the story, the Magistrate is bombarded with lots of ethical questions by his self-reflection. The self-reflection hunts the Magistrate when Colonel Joll appears. Seeing so many inhuman torture, the Magistrate realizes the corrupt of the Empire. However, though the Magistrate wants to dissociate himself from the inhuman torture methods, he still is one of the Empire’s servants. For that, he can’t dissociate himself from the Empire. I think, at the first, the Magistrate keeps the barbarian girl for some kind of compensation for he is one of the servants of Empire. However, because of keeping the girl, he starts to thinking deeper about the relationship between Empire and Colony. He could keep silence while he hears the painful sound from the barbarians. However, based on ethics, he refuses to keep silence and stands out to against the inhuman torments. His outcry about what Bureau so-called justice put himself into torment. It is when the magistrate has come through the same inhuman torture that he learns and experiences the great lesson: justice only can be entertained when one’s body is whole and well. From this statement makes me wonder that what is “justice” we called? Is it that only the concepts of justice constructed by the authorities?
In the audio clips, it says that although J.M. Coetzee as a south African won the Nobel prize, he is not very popular in south Africa for he writes the novel in English and he won’t take obviously political positions. J.M. Coetzee reveals the dark side in the society, but he states that his works is to expose the nature of humans instead of dealing in politics. In my opinion, In Waiting for the Barbarians, it conveys the ugly side of authorities. The Empire as a symbol of authorities in society, the Magistrate as a member under the Empire and, the Barbarians as outsiders that don’t follow the power. It’s sure that the book conveys some concepts and oppositions about authorities and injustice in the real world we live. J.M. Coetzee, as a great writer, that has the knee insights into society, but claims no obvious political position, likes the unrealistic dreamer: he writes about it, but do nothing to change the present situation. Moreover, stating that his work of Waiting for the Barbarians is only about revealing the human nature. I think it’s the reason why he is not so popular in south Africa though his works were recognized as one of the greatest books worldwide
Although often compared to Kafka, J.M. Coetzee is not very popular in South Africa for the reason of not taking an obvious political position. But having lived through an era of harsh colonialism, his work, although very personal, is filled with wonderfully disturbed history. In his book Disgrace, the gang raped daughter did not want to report the rape. “The reason [of not wanting to report the rape] is that, as far as I’m concerned, what happened to me was a purely private matter. In another time, in another place, it might be held to be a public matter, but in this time, in this place it is not. It’s my business. Mine alone. This place being what? This place being South Africa.” Mark Mathabane, another famous South African writer, explains the book as Coetzee’s way of forcing us to deal with the issue of human pain, suffering, shame, and responsibility in a new world order, where we had hoped that all these problems have found solutions. Although Coetzee is the winner of numerous prestigious awards, he remains living a humble and uniformed lifestyle. “The celebrity status is something I’ve managed to dodge quite successfully all my life,” he said in an interview in 1999. As all brilliant men have reasons for their brilliance, the qualities of humility and regimentation must be two reasons for J.M. Coetzee’s success.
J.M. Coetzee's works are mainly about people’s living conditions under the oppression of apartheid. After reading Waiting for the Barbarians, I found that the words written in this novel were so specific and careful, for example the description of the Magistrate’s feeling, and so profound, especially dialogues between no matter the Magistrate and the barbarian girl or other characters. J.M. Coetzee always holds a sense of ethnics in hand and criticizes the ruthless rationalism under the present western society directly. When Coetzee was awarded by Nobel Prize, the Swedish Academy even stated that Coetzee "in innumerable guises portrays the surprising involvement of the outsider", and also cited his "well-crafted composition, pregnant dialogue and analytical brilliance". From my perspectives, Coetzee’s language in writing is extremely concise but specific at the same time; just like he never says any unnecessary words, and there are no redundant words in his novel.
There is no denying that the dominant history is almost written by the victors, but in my opinion, history is not so absolute. J.M. Coetzee focuses on the other side, or to say the dark side of victory, using political words to judge the right and wrong with a silent expression.
What makes me impressed in the audio is that Coetzee shows an attitude that he does not like celebrity so much and he even did not go to take his award neither Brook Prize nor Nobel Prize. To my way of thinking, his personality is just like his writing style in his novels. Coetzee cares about the subordinate otherness in society, and does not look at the brighter things such as the victors. He describes the real qualities of human beings which are hidden by hypocritical masks precisely, accurately and successfully.
After listening the introduction about J.M. Coetzee, he makes me think of another celebrity in the history, whose name is Ted Williams. They have the same personality as being famous in career but mysterious in other aspects. It is pretty unique nowadays. For winning the Booker Prize and the Nobel Prize in Literature, he must have numerous opportunities to make his career more successful, Coetzee somehow chooses to teach in the university and keep writing quietly.
“The Bluest Eye”. “Heart of Darkness” and “Waiting for the Barbarians” are the three novels that I have read. Among them, “Waiting for the Barbarians” is the most remarkable one. The story depicts the crucial fact of authority, not criticizing it directly but just pointing out the whole situation. Leaving a space to reflect and seriously showing his worrying to this subject. We never have any feeling in this position for being a normal person; however, those weaker races have suffered several pain and discrimination for a long time. This novel gets me starting to think of the validity of so-called orthodoxy. Same as the Magistrate, I feel sorry for being one of the stronger side in this cycle.
Last thing inspires me is the words that professor said in the class. I finally got the idea about studying. In these three years, I have got lots of pictures in every group around the world. Knowing the imperfect fact is dejected, but I understand I still have a lot to work on and cherish. Everytime finishing reading, I feel I am more complete and thoughtful, which really encourages me from time to time.
J.M. Coetzee is a distinguished novelist and political writer from South Africa. As a white South African, Coetzee’s work is concerned with the ambivalence and the pain from colonialism. The audio clips mentioned that Coetzee is a reclusive man, and always silent. And also Coetzee is like a monk who doesn’t drink, smoke or eat meat. Although he has gained many awards, like the Booker Prize and the Novel Prize in Literature, he always avoids award ceremonies. Coetzee also said that he didn’t believe he would be ruined by fame. His self-discipline and solitude seem that relate to how could he represent the darkness, oppression and cruelty in his novels. In Coetzee’s work, there are struggling stories with conflicts. He represents the oppressive issue about race in Waiting For the Barbarians and his other work, like Disgrace. In Waiting For the Barbarians, Coetzee perfectly represents the magistrate’s conflict, as readers we could see the magistrate’s confusion in his mind when he tries to find out why he wants to keep the barbarian girl. In this novel, Coetzee describes the oppressive and crucial story with the part of hunting, the relationship between the magistrate and the barbarian girls and dreams that seem like clues that help readers to find out the issue of self and otherness.
History is constructed, not the truth. Although history is always written by dominant groups, victors, the pain of minor groups still could not be denied. From Coetzee’s work, I am impressed by the paragraph in Waiting For the Barbarians, the magistrate said that “Or perhaps whatever can be articulated is falsely put,…Or perhaps it is the case that only that which has not been articulated has to be lived through.”
J. M. Coetzee, the winner of two Booker Prize and the Nobel Prize, is well respective compared to Kafka in terms of his approach to the world, to life and of his capability in capturing the bleak side of life. It is noted that Coetzee’s books are deeply political. They are always fascinated with power and often explore how dominant political group impose their way on cultures. He continuously seeks to deal with the issues of a more fundamental level in many of his work such as human pain, suffering, shame, and responsibility in a new world order where we had hoped that all these problems will find solutions.
As a brilliant novelist and a scrupulous doubter, Coetzee is ruthless in his criticism of the cruel rationalism in cosmetic morality of western civilization. The fact that he has great ability to speak for solitary people has a lot to do with his background and personality. Coetzee comes from a farming family in South Africa that opposed the apartheid regime. With his self-deprecating and reclusive characteristic, he puts himself in arm’s length’s distance between himself and South Africa and dedicating himself to painting the very bleak picture of this place from an outsider point of view. He turns the solitude into the stories that look inward to the innermost grain of conflict in South Africa. But, instead of considering himself a herald of community or anything else, he regards himself as someone who has intimations of freedom as every chained prison has and constructs representation of people’s slipping their chains and turning their faces to the light. As with the case in “Waiting For The Barbarians”, the Magistrate is presented to be constantly struggling with damnation, search for salvation in his own version of hell. Also, in his 1999 novel “Disgrace” mentioned in the audio, Coetzee shows his deeply awareness of how over the years anxiety of a certain kind have feud colonial nightmares and that kind of suffering is very much a consequence of the brutality of colonialism which we are not likely to escape very easily.
In the report, J.M. Coetzee is described as a reclusive person, he rarely gets interview; however, he cares about people, and he uses his work to make people pay attention to the difficult issues that are seldom being faced to.
By seeing through the world in a bleak point of view, he captures dark sides of life. Not like some politics, they pretend they mentioned about defending the rights of developing or undeveloping countries only when they want for votes. The politics always talk too much, but seldom manage to turn things into a better condition. On the other side, as an author J.M. Coetz use a rational voice to remind reader the dark side of the world. Most of us do not realize we have to pay the price for regarding ourselves more civilization than others. Once we realize have to take a part of responsibility of that, if we are going to have a journey to search for salvation just like the magistrate does.
One thing that draws my attention in one of the clips is that it is said that Coetzee uses an outsider’s point of view to write stories, keeping a certain distance between himself and the status in South Africa. I find it kind of weird because when I read Waiting for the Barbarians, the narrative seems to be the introspection of the powerful one. Coetzee is the white man in high social position, and in this novel, the magistrate resembles himself. Besides, the novel is kind of like an essay which reveals a significant issue; hence, the first-person narrator “I” appears like the writer himself. In his first-person narrative, the introspective tone, in my opinion, can also draw out the readers’ introspection. It is a very good way Coetzee chooses, which keeps him little distance to the issue of the story and has readers introspect with him. However, the speaker in the clip does not think so.
Another thing in one of the clips impresses me a lot; it is said that we are not likely to escape from the consequence of the history so easily. This thought is also suggested in Waiting for the Barbarians, for it is the persecution of the colonization operated by the powerful that composes an important role of the story and reminds the readers that the cruel history cannot be ignored. It is also said in the clip that Coetzee is brilliant for drawing out the bleak side of life and that the characters in his stories don't always get out of their own versions of hell. Indeed, I think all the darkness conveyed by his novel has to be faced by us who possess vested interests in the society, by which we can make efforts to expiate our sin and compensate for what we had done to the powerless. That is why the magistrate in the novel incessantly deals with his shame, damnation, ethical responsibility, and searching for salvation—only through these ways can we be possible to make some changes.
P.S. I upload it late because the Internet of my computer becomes out of work at about 11:50, and I finish uploading it in my friend's home...ˊˋ
Hearing from the audio clips, it says that J.M. Coetzee is a notoriously private man for he didn’t pick up the prizes he won. J.M. Coetzee turns the solitude in the story inward to the inner conflicts in south Africa. He is a white south African who often writes from an outsider of point of view. The commentator states that J.M. Coetzee’s work covers the issues of ethical and political questions. It not only reveals the problems in south Africa but also the universal problems. In the Waiting for the Barbarians, the Magistrate reflects on his identity as a member of the empire. Throughout the story, the Magistrate is bombarded with lots of ethical questions by his self-reflection. The self-reflection hunts the Magistrate when Colonel Joll appears. Seeing so many inhuman torture, the Magistrate realizes the corrupt of the Empire. However, though the Magistrate wants to dissociate himself from the inhuman torture methods, he still is one of the Empire’s servants. For that, he can’t dissociate himself from the Empire. I think, at the first, the Magistrate keeps the barbarian girl for some kind of compensation for he is one of the servants of Empire. However, because of keeping the girl, he starts to thinking deeper about the relationship between Empire and Colony. He could keep silence while he hears the painful sound from the barbarians. However, based on ethics, he refuses to keep silence and stands out to against the inhuman torments. His outcry about what Bureau so-called justice put himself into torment. It is when the magistrate has come through the same inhuman torture that he learns and experiences the great lesson: justice only can be entertained when one’s body is whole and well. From this statement makes me wonder that what is “justice” we called? Is it that only the concepts of justice constructed by the authorities?
In the audio clips, it says that although J.M. Coetzee as a south African won the Nobel prize, he is not very popular in south Africa for he writes the novel in English and he won’t take obviously political positions. J.M. Coetzee reveals the dark side in the society, but he states that his works is to expose the nature of humans instead of dealing in politics. In my opinion, In Waiting for the Barbarians, it conveys the ugly side of authorities. The Empire as a symbol of authorities in society, the Magistrate as a member under the Empire and, the Barbarians as outsiders that don’t follow the power. It’s sure that the book conveys some concepts and oppositions about authorities and injustice in the real world we live. J.M. Coetzee, as a great writer, that has the knee insights into society, but claims no obvious political position, likes the unrealistic dreamer: he writes about it, but do nothing to change the present situation. Moreover, stating that his work of Waiting for the Barbarians is only about revealing the human nature. I think it’s the reason why he is not so popular in south Africa though his works were recognized as one of the greatest books worldwide
The Nobel Prize in Literature 2003 was awarded to J. M. Coetzee "who in innumerable guises portrays the surprising involvement of the outsider". He believes that the history is the history of victor with the dominant language. As a result, he uses literature as his weapon not only to fight against apartheid but also to ponder on ethical responsibility. In fact, he is a rather reclusive person. He does not drink, smoke or eat meat. And he scarcely laughs. I think that he, like a martyr, leads a self-disciplined life because he somehow wants to make amends to “the outsider” who he feels impotent to aid. Like the Magistrate in Waiting for the Barbarians, he is tormented by this ethical question. In his subtle relationship with the barbarian girl, he tries to respond ethically to the outsider who has been classified as inferior by race and gender. In Waiting for the Barbarians, J. M. Coetzee deals with the conflict between “our” fancy to know the outsider and the outsider’s flat denial. In his opinion, the other, the enemy or the barbarians are just imagined to confirm the validity of existence of “Self”. And this conflict has lasted for many years. Thus, his novels always end in a bleak tone. In this audio, I am impressed that J. M. Coetzee cares very little for fame. I think he really writes for the issues that he feels indignant. That his portrait of the Magistrate’s frame of mind is humorous but realistic makes us look squarely at the significance of the issues and do something.
In J.M. Coetzee's novel "Waiting for the Barbarian" there is an important issue about ethical problem of the Other.
The author cares about the political or the power structure of South Africa, and he presents the dilemma or the critical thoughts in this book.
Through the long history, our history is always written by the victors, and how they recording about Other is depend on them. Moreover, most of us are not the one who bully or takes advantage to others, but somehow we are do involved in the unfair system.
The dominant power tends to create the evil images of the Other; therefore, they somehow have the excuse to fight with the images they made. In the novel the Magistrate is somehow in a conflict position, because he is suffering from the ethical problems, but at the same time, he is working for an unfair social system. Through the barbarian girl, the Magistrate faces his inner and his nightmare with the procedure of washing the girl, and he feels relieve from his sin, which is being working under the authority, or noticing how unfair the central government treats the Other.
In one of the radio clips, there is one talking about Coetzee is not so popular in South Africa, and one of the reason perhaps is due to he writing in English. Here comes another problem, which language to choose to write about whose stories? Besides, although we try to side with the vanquished, we are still in the group of the dominant power, unless we totally giving up the authority power or the control ability. Otherwise, we probably are changing nothing, but creating another space for ourselves to flee.
“Mystery” is my first impression of the author. J.M. Coetzee has won the Booker Prize twice and is awarded the 2003 Nobel Prize in Literature; however, such a notoriously private person he is that he has never showed up the ceremony of the Booker Prize. Also, he is a solitary, a vegetarian, and a stern man that he keeps his life regularly. And he always deals with dark history with bleak point of view. I am wondering what a person could have written such a vicarious piece when he is actually in a superior position (a white South African). And it happen to I attend a class about global environment and we watch several documentary films describing that the developed countries how to deprive the third world. Any institution, any treaty or any patent brings the poor much more poor. Have you know an open market causes the India farmers committed suicide? Free trade leads to India traditional planting collapsed and remote Indian can neither maintain autarky nor compete the over low-priced strike(by dominant nations.) WTO is the biggest and powerful executor for developed countries; they kill the people of third world without blood. I feel angry at first, then comes guilty because we all involves the murder and buys the product deprived from the poor; it is a sin that hard to get rid of, some chose to ignore it and some like J.M. Coetzee try to bear it through writing. And sometimes we are living in a bitter truth with sweet icing as no one tells us what the disaster will bring to the poor Indian but only how good to become a global village. Therefore, J.M. Coetzee lives isolated to the world to become an outsider to speak for outsider.
J.M. Coetzee, who is from a farming family, is a political writer. He often writes from an outsider point of view, tries to put a link between himself and South Africa, and takes a bleak view of the world and side of life. In his “Waiting for the Barbarians,” the Magistrate tries to respond ethically to the otherness of the barbarian girl who has been classified as inferior by virtue of race and gender. Encountering the barbarian girl, his version of hell and his obsession with shame, damnation, ethical responsibility, and searching for salvation make him start to dig the “Truth.”
One of the audio clips mentions that Coetzee is compared to Kafka often. It reminds me of some similarities between Kafka’s “The Metamorphosis” and Coetzee’s “Waiting for the Barbarians.” Both the main characters, Gregor and the Magistrate, are out of the main streams. Gregor can’t work due to metamorphosis, so he’s isolated from other “normal” people. The Magistrate, who isn’t like other people under imperialism, tries to understand and help the barbarians. However, the civilization doesn’t agree with him, so he is put into prison. Moreover, two characters find their true minds in a grotesque way. Through metamorphosis that his soul and body are separated, Gregor finally realizes what the world he lives before, and through the interaction with a barbarian girl, the Magistrate begins to think what the civilization, including him, have done to other inferiors. Kafka and Coetzee write and stand in the inferiors’ positions.
Coetzee’s works influence readers a lot and win some prizes, but he says, “I’m not a hero of the community of anything else; I’m someone who has intimation of freedom as every personal has…” To sum up, he lets us understand the dark side of the world, and tries to find a brighter side of it.
Post a Comment